Assessment of the Swaziland Investment Promotion Agency

Technical Report Assessment of the Swaziland Investment Promotion Agency By: Mr. Carlos Torres, Team Leader Ms. Michelle Coffee, Investment Promotion Expert Mr. Rodrigo Zapata, Investment Promotion Expert Submitted by: CARANA Corporation Submitted to: Regional Center for Southern Africa, U.S. Agency for International Development Gaborone, Botswana June 2005 USAID Contract No: AFP-I-801-03-000020-00,T.O. #801 P.O. Box 602090? Unit 4, Lot 40? Gaborone Commerce Park? Gaborone, Botswana? Phone (267) 3900884? Fax (267) 3901 027 E-mail: info@satradehub.org

Table of Contents A. Executive Summary...1 B. The Challenges Faced by SIPA...3 1. The Investment Climate in Swaziland...3 2. SIPA s Operating Environment...4 C. Assessment of SIPA...7 1. Can SIPA be effective even in light of the constraints it faces today?...7 D. Recommendations...10 1. Introduction...10 2. Organizational Analysis and Recommendations...10 3. Pilot Project for Targeted FDI Promotional...14 4. Improved Site Visit Procedures...20 5. Development of an Initial Investor Data Base...21 6. Procedures for Creating and Maintaining a Data Base at SIPA...22 7. Media for Information for Investors Database...23 Attachment I - Site Visit Procedures...25 1. Defining the Site Visit...25 2. Communications Between SIPA and the Investor...25 3. Preparation of the Preliminary Site Visit...26 4. Discussion of the Preliminary Site Visit with the Investor and Preparation of Final Site Visit...27 5. Preparation for the Actual Site Visit...27 6. The Site Visit...27 7. Follow-up...29 8. Additional Comments...29 9. Sample Site Visit Schedule (Itinerary) For A First Time Visit...29 Attachment II - Initial Data Base Documents...32 Attachment III - Sample Data Base Outline and Documents - Honduras...33 Attachment IV - Comments on the Draft Report Submitted by CARANA Corporation and Responses...53 Attachment V - Scope of work...62

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the two week period from April 18 to April 30, 2005, a team of consultants from CARANA Corporation conducted an assessment of the Swaziland Investment Promotion Authority (SIPA). This assessment was designed in response to SIPA s request for a review of their overall operation, processes and vision, and to provide recommendations for a general improvement of the organization and its effectiveness in Swaziland based on best practices in investment promotion. Specifically, the scope of work for this assignment calle d for an assessment of SIPA s overall strategy, its organizational structure, operations, marketing, budget, and effectiveness. The scope of work also called for specific training or technical assistance interventions which were to be implemented during the second week. During the two weeks period, the consulting team interviewed SIPA s staff, met with private businessmen in Swaziland including foreign investors, and tested SIPA s capabilities in foreign direct investment (FDI) promotion. However, because SIPA is also involved in providing investor aftercare services as well as services to the local population in the promotion of domestic investment and small and medium scale (SME) development, the consulting team also spend time analyzing these functions at SIPA. This report is organized into four sections; this executive summary, a review of the challenges faced by SIPA, an assessment of SIPA (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats), and recommendations. Five attachments are also included in the report. The first three provide additional details on the recommendations made in this report. The fourth attachment contains a list of questions made by SIPA officials after reviewing the draft report, and the responses to these questions by the consultants. The fifth attachment contains a copy of the scope of work which was given to the consultants in carrying out the assessment of SIPA. The Challenges Faced by SIPA A review of the investment climate and the operating environment in which SIPA operates concludes that SIPA is facing an enormous task in taking on the responsibility for promoting investment in the country. As discussed in section B of this report, the investment climate in Swaziland is less than ideal. Apparel investment which flowed into Swaziland to take advantage of the now defunct apparel quota system were willing to invest in Swaziland in spite of the poor investment climate, however with the dismantling of this system at the beginning of this year, SIPA s task has become much more difficult. The operating environment within which SIPA operates also makes SIPA task more difficult. A broad mandate, which includes FDI promotion, investor facilitation, domestic investment promotion, and SME development is too broad. When viewed within the context of SIPA s limited budget, the broad mandate becomes almost an impossible mandate to fulfill. Complicating this situation is the fact that SIPA managers are often called on by other government officials to participate in activities nationally and abroad that consume resources, but don t necessarily contribute to SIPA s results. 1

An Assessment of SIPA An assessment of SIPA (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) was carried out in order to determine the types of activities that SIPA should undertake in order to be more effective within the investment climate and operating environment presented in Section B of the Report. The SWOT analysis was based on interviews and on information gathered from SIPA staff as well as from busine ssmen in Swaziland working in different sectors, and is presented in Section C. This SWOT analysis led to the identification of the recommendations which are presented in Section D of the report. Recommendations Recommendations have been made in four principal areas; organizational structure and responsibilities, a targeted FDI promotional activity in South Africa, improved investor site visit procedures, and the need to create an investor data base of often requested information. These recommendations are based on the assumption that in the short run at least, both the investment climate in Swaziland, and the operating environment in which SIPA operates in will not change. These recommendations can and should be implemented during the current year, and were designed keeping in mind SIPA s limited financial resources. These recommendations impact on the one area where SIPA can influence the investment process and impact FDI in Swaziland improved service levels. By implementing these recommendations, and combining a more targeted approach to FDI with improved service levels at home, SIPA will be taking on a more proactive approach to investment promotion which should result in increased investment and employment in the Kingdom of Swaziland. 2

B. THE CHALLENGES FACED BY SIPA 1. The Investment Climate in Swaziland Studies conducted by the World Bank and others have shown that a strong positive investment climate directly impacts on the success of any investment promotion program. Consequently, SIPA s ability to meet annual job creation targets is directly impacted by Swaziland s investment climate. To better understand and summarize Swaziland s investment climate, the consulting team analyzed ten factors that define what investors look for in an investme nt site. These are: Factors Making Up the Investment Climate Market Access Labor Force Real Estate Taxes Living Conditions Local, Regional, Global Market access Availability/Cost Education Language skills Health Land, buildings, office space Availability/Cost Ownership Low levels Incentives Customs duty Housing Climate Social Amenities Availability/Cost agreements Skills/Training institutions/facilit ies exemptions Utilities Industry Linkages Transport/Logistics Infrastructure Business Conditions Business Support & Promotion Power/Water IT Waste Mgt Availability, Cost and reliability Availability of raw materials, natural resources Synergies and backward linkages Roads Ocean Ports Airports Railways Political stability Robust legal framework Businessfriendly regulations Level playing field One stop service Customer support pre and post sale Swaziland has problems in almost all of the above. Examples of some of the major areas of concern are presented below: Market Access: While the country is a member of the key regional and global market access agreements, several businessmen mentioned that in some cases tariff and nontariff barriers are used by neighboring countries to protect their domestic production (i.e. COMESA). Labor Force: The HIV AIDS epidemic is a major concern. It affects worker productivity and increases training costs. Some businessmen also cited that given the rural / agricultural background of most new workforce participants, there was a lack of an industrial work ethic in the general workforce. Taxes: While low income tax rates are advertised, they are rarely available to investors. Utilities: Power and water costs are very high. Information and communications infrastructure is still weak. 3

Industry Linkages: Few inputs are readily available locally. General Business Conditions: General poor or no country image. The legal framework (rule of law) is considered weak in Swaziland. Business regulations are cumbersome and many times are not clear (Investor Roadmap Study). Significant Emalangeni / Rand revaluations against major world currencies have also made it ever harder to remain competitive in export markets. Given some of the weaknesses in the investment climate presented above, there is no doubt that SIPA faces a formidable task in carrying out its mandate to promote investment in the country. The constraints affecting investment flows in Swaziland have been clearly identified and are widely known. Reducing and/or eliminating these constraints should be the National Priority of the Government if it is serious about promoting investment. The lack of a positive investment environment, however, is not an automatic prescription for failure. Strategies, such as the development of export and investment incentives and the development of targeted investment promotion programs, have been designed to work around a poor policy environment and have been used successfully in other countries. However the role of the investment promotion agency becomes more critical in a less than optimal investment climate given that the agency must increase the level and quality of the services it offers if it is going to try and make up for a negative investment climate. 2. SIPA s Operating Environment A review of SIPA s operating environment was carried out to better understand the constraints with which SIPA operates and to measure its ability to make up for a less than optimal investment climate. SIPA s operating environment is defined as those administrative and operating factors that affect its ability to carry out its mandate effectively. The operating environment that impacts on SIPA s ability to function efficiently is mixed. SIPA does appear to have a great deal of flexibility in how it manages its financial resources when compared to other investment promotion agencies. It can recruit and compensate its staff based on market rates, and appears to be have a great deal of leeway in how it develops and implements it promotional strategies. However, just as the investment climate presents SIPA with a number of strategic challenges, the operating environment surrounding SIPA also presents a number of problems that impact its ability to be successful. a. SIPA s mandate Of major concern is SIPAs broad mandate, which includes foreign direct investment (FDI), domestic investment promotion, and SME development. Each one of these areas represents a major challenge on its own, however when all three areas are combined in one institutions, particularly one with limited financial resources as is 4

SIPA, then succeeding in the implementation of this broad mandate becomes next to impossible. To understand why SIPA s mandate is too broad, it is important to understand the differences between FDI promotion activities, domestic investment promotion activities and SME development. While programs designed to promote each of these activities may have the same goals (i.e. job creation, new investment, export sales, etc.) they are very different from each other in the strategies and operating tactics that they use. The differences among these types of programs begins with defining what the objective of the program is and who the beneficiary, or client is. In FDI promotion, the objective is to entice a foreign investor to invest in the host country. The client or beneficiary is usually an established foreign company that most probably has access to capital, technology and markets. In this case the beneficiary only requires information in order to make an informed investment decision on a country, and is looking for the investment site that will provide the best mix of factors to maximize profits. In domestic investment promotion, the objective is to develop local companies or entrepreneurs so that they increase their level of activity in the host country. The client is this case will most likely be a local investor with access to some, but probably not all of the factors necessary to be successful in his/her venture (appropriate technology, capital and markets) and therefore requires technical assistance in these areas. In SME development, the problems encountered in domestic investment promotion are compounded, given that in these cases a program is usually working with a much less unsophisticated client with little or no business training. The difference in the objectives of each of the programs and in the needs of the beneficiary or client lead to very different types of activities. In FDI promotion, the focus of the program is on identifying potential investors (clients) and selling them on investment in the host country. In domestic investment promotion, the focus of the program becomes one of providing technical assistance and training to relatively sophisticated clients that may need help in a few areas. In SME development, the level of sophistication of the client still requires technical assistance and training, but at a much more basic level given that the scale of the investment will be much more moderate than in a domestic promotion activity. The differences cited above make for very different strategies and activities which in turn lead to very different types of organizations. These differences clearly argue for different organizations to implement each of the three programs. Conversely, grouping all of these activities in one organization, particularly one with extremely limited financial resources as is SIPA, is a recipe for failure. It is our recommendation that SIPA focus primarily on FDI promotion, limiting its activities in domestic investment promotion to promoting greater linkages between FDI in Swaziland and the local economy. SME development activities should be 5

limited to providing basic information and referring inquiries to other institutions in the country that handle SME development. This recommendation is not based on a determination that one type of promotional activity is more important than the other. Rather, this recommendation is based on the fact that limited financial resources make it imperative that SIPA focus activities if it is to be at all successful. The rec ommendation to focus on FDI promotion is based on SIPA s main target, which is job creation. Experiences of other countries that have demonstrated that under the right conditions, FDI promotion is the most efficient way to create new jobs and can be much more cost effective than developing domestic investment or SME development in general. Furthermore, while there are other institutions in Swaziland providing services to SMEs, and to a lesser degree, domestic investors, there is no other institution in Sw aziland providing FDI services or that is better suited to provide these services. b. Budget Limitations SIPA s operating budget has been severely limited since the termination of the EU project that supported SIPA in its early years. For the fiscal year ending in 2004, SIPA s budget was only US $650,000 a minimal amount with which to carry out any one of the areas defined in its mandate, let alone all three areas as described above. An analysis of the 2004 operating budget revealed that approximately 66% of the budget was necessary to cover salaries alone, and that approximately another 26% was necessary to cover overhead and administrative line items. This left less than 10% of the budget, approximately US $55,000, to cover travel and promotional costs. For the current fiscal year (2005-2006), SIPA was provided with a budget of approximately US $850,000, a great improvement over the previous years funding level, but still far short of what would be required to implement programs in the areas included in SIPA s mandate. Even if SIPA could concentrate exclusively on FDI promotion, SIPA would require a budget of at least US $1,000,000 annually to begin to be effective - in addition to greater levels of technical assistance and training in order to improve its FDI promotional services. c. Conflicting Government Initiatives Another area which affects SIPA s effectiveness is the fact that SIPA s managers are occasionally called out to accompany representatives from Government ministries or other institutions to events or on trips that are not always central to SIPA s activities. The consulting team witnessed this several times during the two week period in Swaziland. These request burden an institution with limited staff and tend to take staff away from greater value added activities, forcing staff to take on more of a reactive mode. 6

C. ASSESSMENT OF SIPA 1. Can SIPA be effective even in light of the constraints it faces today? The answer to the above question is yes even facing the constraints that SIPA faces with regards to the investment climate and the operating environment. However, in order to determine the types of activities that SIPA should undertake to be more effective, the consulting team conducted a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis of SIPA. The SWOT analysis was based on interviews and on information gathered from SIPA staff as well as from businessmen in Swaziland working in different sectors. a. SIPA s Strengths Name recognition: SIPA is an existing institution with a recognizable brand name in Swaziland. Mandate: There is a Government mandate that outlines SIPA s responsibilities. While we believe that SIPA s mandate is too broad, the fact that SIPA s mandate in FDI promotion is clear is positive. Measurable Results: SIPA has achieved measurable results in the past (especially with Taiwanese companies in the apparel sector for entry into the US market under AGOA). However, these companies invested in Swaziland for a specific reason (i.e. apparel quota to the US), and it is unlikely that future FDI investment flows at those levels will be achieved in Swaziland without a much stronger, targeted FDI promotion program. Human Resources: SIPA s existing human resources are experienced and interested in contributing to Swaziland s development. As mentioned earlier in this report, SIPA s human resources are limited in number and spread out over a wide range of activities which will not Facilities and Equipment: SIPA has adequate physical facilities and equipment. While SIPA s physical facilities and equipment are adequate, SIPA will need to reinvest in this area fairly soon as much of the equipment is nearing the end of its useful life. b. SIPA s Weaknesses Lack of an Effective Promotional Strategy: SIPA does not have an effective strategy for targeted, effective FDI promotion. SIPA lacks: - Country / sector research or a diversification strategy. - Access to company databases in target country / sectors. - Adequate promotion management systems and procedures. - Adequate promotional materials and investor information. Reactive: As a result of the above, SIPA has adopted a Reactive modus operandi rather than a Proactive approach. Much of the above can be explained by the operating environment in which SIPA must work (lack of financial resources, broad mandate, etc.) which limit the extent to which SIPA could develop and operate a targeted FDI promotion program. 7

c. SIPA s Opportunities To become the most important contributor to Swaziland s economic development. To secure international cooperation and assistance (EU, USAID, Government of Taiwan, etc.). d. SIPA s Threats Mandate: The current mandate covering FDI, Domestic Investment and SME Development is too low. Funding: Continued low levels of funding threaten the effectiveness of the institution. Government Interference / Demands: These demands stretch SIPA s already limited human and financial resources. Surrender: Operating in a negative environment could lead SIPA personnel to surrender to investment and operating climate obstacles. Loss of Expertise: Know-how could be lost with personnel turnover. All of the above contributes to insufficient results which could threaten SIPA s very existence This simple SWOT analysis undertaken by the consultants evidenced that SIPA is burdened by many factors that affect its ability to produce results. A broad mandate with limited resources and a perception of working with a poor product has made its operations more difficult, and threaten to demoralized personnel. On the public front, however, government spokespersons which include SIPA managers as well, present overly optimistic public manifestation of expected results. The consultants believe that this could backfire and translate into a loss of credibility for SIPA, further affecting its public standing within the government and with local and foreign investors. In spite of the problems faced by SIPA a poor investment climate and constraints in the operating environment if SIPA could improve its level of service and carry out some organizational changes, the consultants believe that SIPA could become more effective. In the following section of this report, the consultants have made a number of recommendations which could be implemented by SIPA s management and which we believe would bring about positive results in the short run. These recommendations take into account SIPA s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and specifically acknowledge that: It is doubtful that SIPA alone will be able to bring about major improvements in the investment climate in the short run; It is doubtful that SIPA will be able to shed its responsibility for domestic and SME promotion in the short or medium term and therefore will have to spread its limited budget among several major activities; and, 8

It is not likely that SIPA will obtain significant additional funding from the Government in the foreseeable future. 9

D. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Introduction It is the Consultants opinion that SIPA personnel could easily implement a number of programs and improvements in the short run to improve its services and results. These recommended changes are based on lessons learned around the world and will help make SIPA a more effective investment promotion mechanism for Swaziland. We remain confident that SIPA can become an effective Investment Promotion Agency in a relatively short period of time and become the most important contributor to Swaziland s economic development. This new role should bolster its standing within Swaziland and should help it to secure additional international cooperation and assistance (EU, USAID, Government of Taiwan, etc.) as well. To compensate for the country s less than ideal investment climate, a targeted FDI promotion strategy and a superior customer service a nd support system should be implemented in the short term, even within SIPA s budgetary constraints. SIPA will also have to consider a different approach to domestic investment promotion and to its responsibilities in the SME area. To achieve this change in focus, a simple plan of action for the short-term restructuring and enhancement of SIPA s functions, procedures and organizational structure has been presented in this section of the report. The following plan outlines the major issues for consideration. In particular, it tries to identify what the core functions of the organization should and should not be and makes the case for organizational change while outlining the major principles and objectives to guide the strategy formulation and organizational restructuring process. The development of a comprehensive medium-term development strategy for SIPA is not presented here, but careful consideration of the following issues should suffice for the institution to continue to deliver a top quality servic e while remaining active in its business climate monitoring role: Products and services (target sectors, countries and services) provided by SIPA should expand over time as increases in budget permit. SIPA should continue monitoring the investment climate and operating environment it functions in, and should continue to systematically provide feedback to the government on problem areas. SIPA should continue to asses its strengths, weaknesses and core competencies on an ongoing basis, including the continued assessment of the capabilities of existing competitors (countries). 2. Organizational Analysis and Recommendations SIPA is currently organized into three operating units An FDI promotion unit, a Facilitation unit, and a unit supporting SMEs which also carries out a backward linkages activity with established FDIs in the country in addition to an Administrative / Finance unit. All of these report to the General Manager of SIPA who in turn reports to a Board of Directors of private and public sector individuals. Each of the unit directors has an executive officer and a secretary reporting to him, 10

After reviewing SIPA s activities which are carried out within the context of its mandate, the consultants did not feel the need for a major reorganization within SIPA, but did feel that the activities carried out within each of the three operating units should be redefined as discussed below. a. The FDI Promotion Department The FDI Promotion Department should focus on four main activities: A Targeted FDI prom otion activities abroad, for which a pilot program is defined in Section D.3 of this report; An investor services activities which will manage investor site visits to the Kingdom as defined in Section D.4 of this report; The development and maintenance of information and research function that will create and maintain a data base of information to meet the needs of potential investors as defined in Section D.5 of this report; and, A feedback function designed to provide the Ministry of Enterprise and Employment an other relevant government offices on potential problems and solutions, and ways in which the Kingdom can improve its success in attracting new investment (Improvement of KS as an investment site). b. The Investor Facilitation Department All services provided to a company once that company has made a decision to invest in Swaziland should be referred to as Aftercare services. Efficient aftercare services insure a company s satisfaction with the level of service it obtains from SIPA and the country. This hand-holding alleviates bureaucratic red tape problems and allows the country to identify bottlenecks and work towards correcting flaws in the system. Listening to and caring for existing investors is an important activity within any investment promotion effort, and is the primary function of the aftercare specialist. The investor facilitation department should focus on aftercare services to ensure that the process for investors to establish operations in Swaziland goes smoothly. The activities in this department, also known as the one stop investor services department currently works with investors assist them in requesting visa and work permits, as well as some other investor requirement. In the long run, however, the investor facilitation department should strive to expand the level of services offered to include most, if not all, of the different permits and registrations listed in the Investor Road Map study which was also just recently carried out in Swaziland. SIPA should strive to offer investors assistance in coordinating with other government agencies and support services such as the electricity utility and the telephone company. As discussed while in Mbabane, there is no shortcut to establishing one stop services for investors. The concept of having all of the different government agencies place a representative in one location to serve investors is probably not feasible, not is it cost effective given the volume level of investment flowing into Swaziland. The recommended action f or SIPA personnel is to establish a contact at each agency with 11

which it wants to offer a facilitation service and define / document the requirements for the particular permit or process. This will allow SIPA to produce clear instructions to investors on what they must submit to SIPA in order for SIPA to facilitate each process and will insure that there is no delay in the approval process because of a missing document, etc. Each of these the permits / processes that SIPA facilitates should have a clear set of instructions that would form a part of the investor data base discussed in section D.4 of this report. The unit's staff member assigned to the company must constantly monitor the state of the investment process and be prepared to assist the company overcome difficulties which it might encounter. Sometimes IPA s may assign the same Investment Officer who assisted with the site visits and selling process to take personal charge of the project to ensure its success. However, in SIPA s case, we are recommending that an individual within the Investor Facilitation department be responsible for this activity. This individual must be ready to assist the company in resolving issues related to the local and national bureaucracy and the provision of local res ources without being intrusive in internal company issues. These designated account executives (Aftercare officer) should be prepared to play a role coordinating with the Domestic Investment Department (see below), identifying the need for local service providers. The Domestic Investment Department would then be prepared to provide the investor full information on local service providers and make introductions. It is important to create within the Investor Facilitation Department the ability to monitor Swaziland's competitive position vis -à-vis other countries with similar competitive advantages. The main source of information is the investors themselves - those investors that have chosen to invest in Swaziland, and those investors that have not chosen to invest in Swaziland. In the process of providing these investors with follow -up support services, SIPA will find that these investors will provide information on the problems they are encountering. It is important to create an atmosphere of trust a nd dialog between SIPA and these investors in an effort to obtain as much information as possible about the real impressions of the country. This information will be quite useful in evaluating Swaziland s investment climate and will hopefully lead to improvements in the same. Investors that have chosen to invest elsewhere are the other important sources of information. For example, if they did not invest in the Kingdom because of an infrastructure problem (real or perceived), then government officials may be able to work to correct the problem. If an investor did not invest in Swaziland because of misconceptions about the Kingdom, then an examination of the information sources they consulted could yield valuable information for the future. Thus, an Investment Officer and the aftercare specialist assigned to the company should be prepared to question in detail any investor who informs him that the investing decision has not gone in favor of Swaziland. This should be well documented in company files. Additionally, if an important policy or operational issue is identified, the Investment Officer should document this in a memorandum to the Director of the Investor 12

Facilitation Services Unit. Upon analysis and discussion within the Department, the Director of the Department would forward the information to the General Manager and the Ministry of Enterprise and Employment for their analysis and review. This type of feedback will permit SIPA to take a lead role in improving the policy environment and to refine the services it renders to future investors thus building the kingdom s reputation of paying close attention to investor needs. c. The Domestic Investment Department This department, currently referred to as the SMEs department, will also see a shift in focus the most important one being a shift away from SME assistance (to the extent that SIPA can shift these responsibilities to other organizations and agencies in the country that are working with SMEs). Instead, the consultants are recommending that the director of this department focus on developing backward linkages with established investments in the country. This backward linkages function requires assisting existing investors in the country particularly foreign direct investment to identify and source goods and services locally that might otherwise be carried out by the investor directly or imported. It would also require finding a suitable source in the country to supply this demand. Examples of these backward linkages include food services for employees, waste management services, and maintenance services, but could also expand into the supply of packaging materials and other materials that are currently imported but which may be produced competitively locally. The backward linkages function would also provide assistance to the FDI Promotion department in finding suitable local joint venture partners in those cases where a foreign investor was looking for a local investor, partner or supplier. The Director of the SME Division has successfully worked in the backward linkages area, and feels that with more time dedicated to this activity, more results could be achieved. In order to launch a systematic backward linkages program, however, this department will need to reduce the amount of time spent on orienting interested parties and potential SMEs on business opportunities and other general advice, which has proved to yield minimal results over time. This department has already begun that process by having the executive officer in this department take on the responsibility for screening and providing general information to these types of clients. The consultants encourage this decision and also recommend that SIPA develop a small packet of materials for these clients to help orient them on what are the sorts of things they will need to think about and prepare if they are thinking of starting a small business. Over the medium term, however, SIPA will need to work with the Ministry of Enterprise and Employment, with the Small Enterprise Development Company, and others, to better coordinate the responsibilities for the SME sector with the objective of eventually shedding its SME responsibilities. SIPA FDI Promotion activities may also require the creation of joint venture or supply relationships with local investors, and this area would also be the responsibility of the Domestic Investment Department working in close coordination 13

with the FDI Investment Department (the FDI Investment Department would still maintain the primary responsibility for coordinating with the foreign investor until the investment decision was made). There are many benefits involved with the promotion of joint venture or technology transfer relationships, and SIPA should work to encourage these. However, SIPA s investment promotion activities should focus exclusively on developing these through its investment promotion activities, working to match a foreign investor who desires this type of arrangement with a local partner, and not the other way around. SIPA should clearly separate all functions relating to assistance to local industries that do not interface with FDI. Additionally SIPA should not carry out activities designed to raise capital for local industry, or promote local trade interests abroad. We anticipate that some foreign investors may be keen to have Swazi joint venture partners participate in their projects; however, SIPA should be wary of any foreign investor who appears to be seeking a local partner strictly because of a need for capital. A more positive reason would be for the strategic benefits a local partner can provide, such as an existing infrastructure or a general advisor in operating from a Swazi base. In cases where the foreign investor requests an introduction to a potential local partner, SIPA should endeavor to help in locating a suitable partner. It is important to distinguish this situation from the one where SIPA is approached by a Swazi businessman seeking SIPA help in locating a new foreign JV partner overseas. Worthwhile though this may appear, it will inevitably involve a wasteful use of SIPA s resources. Such enquiries from Swazis should be logged into the SIPA JV partner database and no further action is required; SIPA promotional resources can be much better employed seeking foreign projects than foreign partners. In order to have a roster of potential JV partners for suitable opportunities, SIPA should screen applications and maintain a data base of interested Swazis who pass SIPA s criteria. Some of this information already exists within the SME Unit. Typical criteria would be size, track record, and likely compatibility with a foreign partner. Probably the best way to sort this database is by size, industry and region. A complete profile should be kept of each Swazi prospect. By helping to partner foreign companies with domestic investors, the program will combining the strengths of each (access to technology and markets on one hand with local knowledge and access on the other) which should improve the changes of success for each project. 3. Pilot Project for Targeted FDI Promotional a. General vs. Targeted Investment Promotion Experience indicates that when defining an investment promotion strategy countries frequently confuse general promotional efforts with a targete d promotional strategy. While general promotional efforts are important for country branding purposes, they are nonetheless insufficient for an effective attraction of foreign direct investment (FDI) into the country. For the purpose of clarity, we will define both terms before presenting a strategy for SIPA. 14

General Investment Promotion General promotional efforts involve activities such as dissemination of general information, broad image building advertising and the use of general promotional materials, Internet web sites, and investment opportunity profiles. Other typical general activities are investment exhibitions and seminars, missions and shot gun direct mail and telemarketing. (There may be some benefits to be gained from direct mailing and telemarketing when they are sector specific). Targeted Investment Promotion Strategies Targeted promotional strategies are focused and proactive and tend to involve direct selling efforts with potential investors who have been previously identified and researched. Targeted promotion activities include direct visits to investors that have been researched in advance in pre selected countries, as well as specialized presentations or seminars to selected audiences. In the long term, SIPA s investment promotion strategy might even include promotional offices based in selected foreign countries with personnel that seek out and contact potential investors using a selection criteria developed for that purpose. Targeted investment promotion activities have proven to be more effective than general promotion activities and logic follows that the more targeted the activities are the more effective the investment promotion program is. This has been shown to be true in a wide variety of countries in different stage s of development, sophistication and situations. Unfortunately, most investment promotion programs tend to undertake only general investment promotion activities believing it sufficient to attract FDI. Well-managed programs have modified their original efforts and adopted investment promotion strategies that include targeted activities (i.e.: sector research, company profiling and direct contact, etc) showing an increase in results above any increase in costs, thus improving the yield and efficiency of the program substantially. Perhaps the best way of illustrating the concept of effective investment promotion is to compare it with the marketing strategies of successful companies, which usually include the following functions: Market Research, which is used to define the target consumer and the consumer's desires; Product Definition, design or improvement, which is based on market research; Marketing/Selling; which is a combination of different activities or methodologies designed to educate and interest the potential consumer in the product; Completing the Sale; which includes helping the client make the purchase decision, making the product available or assisting the consumer with acquiring the product; and, Feedback; additional market research on consum er satisfaction (or on why consumers do not accept the product), which leads to product improvement or redesign. 15

The process summarized above translates into the following when dealing with an investment promotion program: Definition and identification of the potential investors; Understanding investors and their needs; Establishing contact with potential investors; Providing the investor with relevant information for the investment decision; Selling to the investor - convincing the investor that Swaziland offers the best solution for him or her; Procuring potential investor site visits to the country; Helping the investor in implementing the investment; and, Listening to the investor that chooses to invest in the Kingdom, as well as those investors tha t chose not to come, to determine how to improve the investment climate and the program's services. The FDI promotion strategy which is being recommended for SIPA is built upon the marketing concept described above. Marketing a country or a region is not very different from marketing a product in a competitive environment. Any effective investment promotion effort needs to recognize this and incorporate this into its overall strategy. b. Identifying the Investor There is great deal of confusion as to who (or what) the investor is? Who is this elusive entity being targeted? It is important to clarify and agree upon what is defined as an international investor. Most of the time, the investor is an international company with an established market for its products, up-to-date manufacturing technology and adequate financing. Therefore, while we refer to our potential client as an "investor", for the most part the individuals we are seeking are representatives of companies empowered to take investment decisions. These potential investors are usually looking to enter new markets, access specific raw materials or labor skills or enjoy lower manufacturing and/or distribution costs, for example. Their main motivation in the long run is profit and increasing the returns for their shareholders. For the most part these company representatives use an Investment Promotion Agency (IPA) as an efficient way to gather information on a country or region. What they want is reliable information so that they can make an educated decision on where to locate their investment. Rarely do investors rely on investment profiles to define their investment, and they will almost never carry out an investment in economic sector where they have little or no experience. Knowing this, every investment promotion program should be careful to avoid: Individuals or promoters seeking to develop projects, but who are not established corporations; Investors that are seeking local financing for their project or that request assistance in securing financing; 16

Investors that request subsidies to finance their investment site visit; project analysis, feasibility studies, etc, and, Investors whose reputation and/or seriousness cannot be verified independently. c. Advantage Offerings by Investment P romotion Agencies All IPA s throughout the world offer some kind of package of advantages that allow them to differentiate themselves when competing to attract FDI. Among these are Natural competitive advantages, Market Access, Legal and Regulatory, Financial and Service incentives. These are presented below in an ideal scenario for Swaziland (not all of these apply in Swaziland today). Natural competitive advantages, which may include: Availability and cost of labor Language skills Proximity to ports and transportation hubs, such as Maputo or Durban Availability and cost of power, water and other utilities Micro-climates Natural resources such as timber, etc. Market Access: AGOA: access to USA markets Lome Convention/Cotonou: access to EU markets COMESA: Eastern South Africa Common Market British Commonwealth: access to UK markets Legal and Regulatory: Possibility of 100% foreign ownership of companies Possibility of 100% foreign ownership of land and buildings Simplified/streamlined customs procedures Liberalized migratory regulations Business-friendly legal and regulatory framework Financial Incentives such as: Tax holiday: a full, partial or reduced exemption for a certain period of time. Tax credit for taxes the company would otherwise have to pay. Special tax deductions: allowing extra deductions for specified activities. Special tax rates: lower tax rates than normal. Grants or subsidies for: - Fixed assets: based on the percentage of total assets. - Employment: a monetary amount per person employed. - Training costs: a monetary amount towards agreed training costs. - R&D costs: a percentage of total, subject to a ceiling. - Rental (building) costs: preferential rates on government-owned buildings. - Recruiting costs: service provided by private or public employment agency to company s specifications. 17

Investor Services such as: One-Stop Information services Site Visit support After sale care IPAs use a mixture of these incentives to entice prospective investors. However, it is important to note that tax incentives in particular are costly for the country and therefore are often not favored by Finance Ministries. The advantage package that SIPA needs to offer potential investors will depend largely on the competitive situation SIPA finds itself in. If its chief competitors offer attractive incentives there will be strong pressure from investors on SIPA to offer a similar package. In this regard, SIPA needs to develop a better understanding of the incentives offered by other countries and IPA s with which SIPA competes regionally. d. Implementing a Targeted Investment Promotion Program at SIPA South Africa Rationale: Geographic proximity and relatively low cost of traveling and conducting promotional activities. South African business people know Swaziland and there are already some important success stories of South African investment in Swaziland. Target Sectors: Labor intensive manufacturing and natural resource based production and processing. Companies looking to avoid legal operating restrictions in South Africa, possibly looking to work in closer proximity to Durban and Richards Bay, exporting back to South Africa, to neighboring countries, Europe or elsewhere. Company Data Base: A database of companies to target for a calling program could be put together from South African business association directories, Chambers of Commerce, Government listings, etc. Additional research on individual companies could be conducted through selected company web pages. Methodology: The methodology would center on a cold calling campaign based from SIPA s offices in Mbabane with the sole purpose of securing an appointment to present Swaziland as a potential investment site. The presentations would be organized around 6 bi-monthly, 3 to 5 day trips to South Africa per year by the investment officer. Upon return, to Mbabane, the investment officer will need to follow up on each of the investor contacts and provide specific information required or requested by investors to undertake a First Time Site Visit (FTSV) to Swaziland. This will require a proposal for a site visit itinerary for client review and comment (see Section D.4 on site visit procedures), and conducting the actual site visit. Follow up with each client carrying out a First Time Site Visit will need to be conducted, with possibly additional site visits, until the actual investment is committed. Targets Success Indicators to be Monitored: Per sales trip to South Africa: Conduct 3 First Time Presentations (FTP) per day (minimum of 9 per trip), plus 3 visits to businessmen organizations with at least one 18